TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Sex at dawn question: if hunter gatherer societies practiced forced egalitarian multisexual partnering, then why is there a propensity for modern women to prefer alpha males? Shouldn't they be happy with fucking multiple betas instead?

[deleted]

March 26, 2014

4 upvotes

/r/PurplePillDebate

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Sex at dawn question: if hunter gatherer societies practiced forced egalitarian multisexual partnering, then why is there a propensity for modern women to prefer alpha males? Shouldn't they be happy with fucking multiple betas instead?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	4
Comments	49
Date	March 26, 2014 1:46 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/21dmdd/sex_at_dawn_question_if_hunter_gatherer_societies/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/sex-at-dawn-question-if-hunter-gatherer-societies.286036 https://theredarchive.com/post/286036

Comments

[–]W_Edwards_Deming13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]W_Edwards_Deming1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]taw5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]W_Edwards_Deming1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]W_Edwards_Deming1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Prostitution among animals:

A few studies have been used to promote the idea that prostitution exists among different species of animals such as Adélie Penguins, chimpanzees, and crab-eating macaque. Penguins use stones for building their nests. Based on a 1998 study, media reports stated that a shortage of stones led female Adélie Penguins to trade sex for stones. Some pair-bonded female penguins copulate with males who are not their mates and then take pebbles for their own nests.

Chimpanzees who seem to be trading food for sex are also said by some to be engaging in prostitution.

Image ⁱ - Adelie Penguin

^Interesting: ^Chimpanzee ^| ^Animal ^sexual ^behaviour ^| ^Prostitution ^| ^Common ^chimpanzee

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]taw5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]W_Edwards_Deming0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]taw2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]W_Edwards_Deming0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]amatorfati9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]theubercuber5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]taw7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

Your argument somewhat applies to paleo diets (except humans managed to settle all continents and adapted to extreme diversity of diets just fine, and we even find evidence of some grains consumption from way back).

Your argument completely fails for sexuality. First we know absolutely nothing about Paleolithic sexuality (and in all likelihood it was extremely diverse from culture to culture) - we can just make wild guesses based on other data, but then the argument should go from that other data, completely ignoring intermediate step of Paleolithic sexuality.

And second, human behaviour changed drastically in that time. Scientists argue how gradual or sudden that was, but humans just before Neolithic revolution were behaviourally drastically different from early Homo sapiens, who were in turn drastically different from earlier hominids (with language etc. - it's ridiculous but we have no clue when it actually emerged), who were in turn drastically different from their ape ancestors.

The idea that humans were basically bonobos until 10k years ago is pretty ridiculous.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissCherryPi-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissCherryPi0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh trust me, I don't think lifelong monogamy is a particularly viable solution. I'm in an open marriage myself. I think Capitalism and Communism make a good analogy for monogamy/non-monogamy. Both are just systems to deal with a fundamental human problem. Both are flawed. Depending on the individual, one system may work better than the other, but it's rare either is going to be perfect.

There's plenty of evidence that humans did evolve to pair bond and be somewhat socially monogamous/polygynous but that we are terrible at being sexually monogamous for life. Society says we should be socially and sexually monogamous, Ryan claims there's data that we suck at monogamy, period, and ignores the data on sexual jealousy, paternity freakouts, etc which really detracts from his arguments.

I haven't listened to his podcast but I like to punish myself so I might...

[–]MissCherryPi0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Behavioral modernity:

Behavioral modernity is a term used in anthropology, archeology and sociology to refer to a set of traits that distinguish present day humans and their recent ancestors from both other living primates and other extinct hominid lineages. It is the point at which Homo sapiens began to demonstrate an ability to use complex symbolic thought and express cultural creativity. These developments are often thought to be associated with the origin of language.

There are two main theories regarding when modern human behavior emerged. One theory holds that behavioral modernity occurred as a sudden event some 50 kya (50,000 years ago) in prehistory, possibly as a result of a major genetic mutation or as a result of a biological reorganization of the brain that led to the emergence of modern human natural languages. Proponents of this theory refer to this event as the Great Leap Forward or the Upper Paleolithic Revolution.

The second theory holds that there was never any single technological or cognitive revolution. Proponents of this view argue that modern human behavior is the result of the gradual accumulation of knowledge, skills and culture occurring over hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution. Proponents of this view include Stephen Oppenheimer in his book Out of Eden, and John Skoyles and Dorion Sagan in their book Up from Dragons: The Evolution of Human Intelligence.

Image ⁱ

^Interesting: ^Human ^evolution ^| ^Origin ^of ^language ^| ^Evolution ^of ^human ^intelligence ^| ^Steven ^Mithen

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]theubercuber-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]amatorfati5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]totes_meta_bot1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]theubercuber0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]theubercuber-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dopamine receptor D4:

The dopamine receptor D4 is a G protein-coupled receptor encoded by the DRD4 gene. As with other dopamine receptor subtypes, the D4 receptor is activated by the neurotransmitter dopamine. It is linked to many neurological and psychiatric conditions including schizophrenia, Parkinsons disease, bipolar disorder, addictive behaviors, and eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa and binge eating.

It is also a target for drugs which treat schizophrenia and Parkinson disease. The D4 receptor is considered to be D2-like in which the activated receptor inhibits the enzyme adenylate cyclase, thereby reducing the intracellular concentration of the second messenger cyclic AMP.

Image ⁱ

^Interesting: ^Dopamine ^receptor ^| ^Dopamine ^| ^Dopamine ^receptor ^D3

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]namae_nanka1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]taw10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It's about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_at_Dawn

Big pronouncements about human sexuality coming from evopsych point of view are basically total bullshit because:

we have zero cases of anybody who even remotely looks like unconcacted Paleolithic humans in existence to study
Paleolithic sexuality doesn't really leave any serious archeological evidence (there is genetic evidence, and we can judge some things about sexuality after early civilizations emerged by burial practices etc. but this is both very dubious) - this is something where we could say a lot more about paleo diets or paleo economies than paleo sexuality
all close human ancestors (chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans) have drastically different sexualities, so it's not possible to extrapolate from that
known historical human societies had very diverse sexualities
human social organization and human child development are both total outliers from all other animals, so even if something held for all mammals, it's only very weak evidence it should hold for humans
there's no way in hell to run a controlled trial of any of that (unlike with paleo diets, which are somewhat testable)

You can take all existing evidence from modern data, historical data, and what little you can safely extrapolate from primate biology and you'd see that men and women are moderately different, but it won't look anything like TRP, or like Sex at Dawn, or any other big theory.

From just the kind of evidence we have access to, I doubt we'll ever get any robust scientific understanding here. Acting on anecdotal evidence in absence of robust science is totally legit, but it should not be confused with real science.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]somniopus3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sex at Dawn:

Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality is a book dealing with the evolution of monogamy in humans and human mating systems. First published in 2010, it was co-authored by Christopher Ryan, Ph.D and Cacilda Jethá, MD (Portuguese pronunciation: [kɐˈsiɫðɐ ʒɨˈta]). In opposition to what the authors see as the 'standard narrative' of human sexual evolution, they contend having multiple sexual partners was common and accepted in the environment of evolutionary adaptedness. Mobile self contained groups of hunter gatherers are posited as the human norm before agriculture led to high population density. According to the authors, before agriculture sex was relatively promiscuous, and paternity was not a concern, in a similar way to the mating system of Bonobos. According to the book, sexual interactions strengthened the bond of trust in the groups; far from causing jealousy, social equilibrium and reciprocal obligation was strengthened by playful sexual interactions. The book has received generally positive reviews in the popular press, with many praising the book's willingness to confront conventional wisdom in an engaging way, and has won several awards. However, all academic commentaries (only three so far) on the book have been negative and argue that humans have a history that involves more monogamy than Sex at Dawn acknowledges, that the book misrepresents the current state of research to the general public, and does so deliberately in aid of an "ideological" agenda.

Image ⁱ

^Interesting: ^Sexual ^dimorphism ^| ^Evolutionary ^psychology ^| ^Sperm ^competition ^| ^Female ^copulatory ^vocalization

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]rulenumber3033 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FortunateBum0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]suscitareMGTOW Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zenmushroom0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've read Sex at Dawn! To be honest, I think much of the book followed the "Noble Savage" line of thought. There are many academics who dream of a perfect, egalitarian society where everyone was nice to each other, and everyone could fuck everyone.

However, there are some alternative view points:

Lawrence H. Keeley in his book "War Before Civilization."

As well as the Anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon who lived among the brutal Yanamamo Amazonian tribe for 25 years.

Chagnon observed a very hierarchical mating system, where the most brutal guys in the tribe mated with most of the women. If a woman tried to mate with someone else, he would beat her.

Of course this is just one guy's observation of a modern day tribe, but it's still very different than the optimistic "Sex at Dawn" narrative.

Keely also describes an ancient world where brutality, rape and hierarchy were a natural part of life.

[–]W-Z-Rself-hating terper0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sh1vRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]lbspredh-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter